Nonprofit University Blog

 Announcement:  there will not be, now, tomorrow or ever, a $700 billion or even an $85 billion bailout for the nonprofit sector.  So, when we say we are businesses, don’t get too carried away with that thought.  Remember, we are businesses that must be beholden to our mission, balancing our bottom line with how well we are delivering on the promises of our mission.  Like so many other examples of the past, we are facing another perfect example of the fact that “we must run like a business” is no better advice for a nonprofit than saying “do not run like a nonprofit.”  The sage advice is to operate like a smart, ethical organization of any kind that is clear as to its priorities (in the case of a nonprofit, its mission) and the ethos of how its community must operate (in the case of both nonprofit and for-profit, the core values). 

In other words, clarity on mission and core values, using both as the compass that guides the organization in every decision, every action, every interaction is the right way to run an organization. So, step back for a moment from your panic over the economy, stop believing that more money is the answer to all that ails your organization and ask yourself this question:  are the members of this organization clear about and galvanized around the mission and core values.  If and only if the answer is a firm yes, you may go back to worrying about the economy and how it will affect your organization.  If, however, the answer is not a firm yes, pull the board and staff immediately together and get clear.

This week, The Nonprofit Center held its first grantmakers panel of this academic year.  As the moderator, I got to ask a number of questions up front before opening it up for questions from the floor. 

And even though I knew what the elephant in this room looked like, I intentionally held off asking about it until I made sure that the audience had heard what it needed to hear:  what are the strategic priorities of the particular funders represented on the panel, how do they like to be approached (some phone call, some e-mail), what makes a proposal really sing (oh, little things like following they guidelines and being complete), what makes a proposal sink (oh, little things like not being things the organization funds or sending in an incomplete package—in fact, all of the funders, representing seven different funding bodies, estimated that at least 50% of applications received are incomplete), and more.  (Check out our free tip sheet on common mistakes grantwriters make).

And then I asked it:  Are any of you planning on an $85 billion bailout program for nonprofits in the region?  Just kidding!  I asked what their current projections and expectations are for how the present economy will affect their funding program.  And three out of the four—all representing established, large foundations–responded that they weren’t anticipating an impact.  The fourth–who represents the foundations of each of four different family members though that perhaps for two, maybe three, of the family members who stick close to the 5% line there would be an impact; but for fourth who give well beyond the 5% mark, there would be no change.  The messages appear mixed:  Robin Hood Foundation appears to have raised significantly less at its “gold standard” gala this past spring, but funders here are saying they are staying the course.  From others, we are hearing cautionary tales and angst.

Let’s hear from you: What’s the view from where you sit?

I love oxymorons, and frequently get tired of having to use the crystal clear example of jumbo shrimp to explain to the uninitiated what an oxymoron is.  Thanks to Thomas Wolf, author of Managing a Nonprofit in the 21^st Century, I was reminded of one I’d clearly long forgotten:  organized abandonment.  (It was Peter Drucker who introduced this concept.)  Whenever I hear this term, I see a wonderful flower power child running through fields with a billowing skirt, long hair blowing in the wind, flowers and butterflies, etc., juxtaposed to the old-school executive secretary with the tight bun, glasses, long, straight and oh so prim and proper suit, stencil pad and pen following the boss around.

The term came back to me as I’ve been thinking of how can we help organizations get through what is shaping into some tough times for many.  Organized abandonment is the planned phasing out of operations–of a program that is no longer relevant to the mission, of a program that is being done much better by others, of a program that no longer is viable, or, even worse to many, the planned phasing out of an organization.

Far too often, there is simply abandonment, minus the organized.  An organization simply closes down as it has run out of money.  A program’s plug is suddenly pulled.  Prior to the decision to close an organization or program, all energy and effort was focused on paths to survival, as opposed to planned paths for cessation.  So, no warning was given to, nor preparation made for clients, staff, funders, or the public.  Rather, all read/hear the announcement via the media, whisper down the lane, etc.  In these situations, it is true abandonment.  That is the emotion everyone experiences.  Not to mention surprise, sorrow (at times), fear, and more.

But do not save this concept for only when you think a program or the organization is tanking.  The Organized Abandonment Grid may be a valuable tool to use to assess just how healthy—or not—your parts and your whole are, in good economic times and bad.  Doing this kind of strategic assessment may help your organization keep running through the fields, with the flowers and the butterflies, and smiles.

I don’t know whether it is because I have spent so much of my life in academia or because I am Jewish, and later in life decided to use Yom Kippur as a day to fast and reflect, but September is the start of new years for me.  Not the time when you sing Auld Lang Syne and party.  But the time when you reflect upon the past year and on what worked, what didn’t, what you want to change and what you want to toss. 

It is the time to think forward, and  project for the coming year as to what you want a year from now.  What do you want to be reflecting upon throughout the year and looking back upon this time next year. Reflection is something that nonprofits—the individuals within and the organizations as wholes—don’t do well.  It seems as if reflection is relegated to an annual (if the organization and its individuals are lucky) strategic planning session, used either to initiate the planning process or to monitor an existing plan.  (And so now, my true confession:  this is one of the reasons why I have come to dislike strategic planning and have stopped consulting on strategic planning:  it is an excuse not to be reflective and strategic the rest of the year.) 

But reflection should not be a time-specific thing, put into a box and let out once a year.  Reflection needs to be on-going, adjusting to what is going on.   And reflection needs to take place at the organizational, programmatic and individual staff member level.  It doesn’t need to be cumbersome and involved, as strategic planning is.  Everyone doesn’t need to know it is happening, but communicating it (which is where I fall short) does need to happen.  It just needs to happen that we all regularly sit back, stop the grind, and think about it all—the big and the little—and is it all doing its best.  

Without reflection we are leaving the future to chance.